On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 14:59:35 +0200
ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:

> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 04:25:41PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote:  
> >> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:  
> >> > > +         (add-after 'move-state-files 'wrap-program  
> >> > 
> >> > Do we really need this wrapper?  Can’t we instead take it as a
> >> > patch from Debian or something?  I’m not a fan of inline Bash
> >> > code, and not very confident of scripts that do ‘rm -rf’.  :-)
> >> >   
> >> Unfortunately, Debian doesn't have any related patches because it's
> >> state files are writable in the equivalent of our store
> >> directories. It seems like the bash script will have to stay for
> >> the sake of functionality unless someone comes up with something
> >> cleaner, though I prefer to avoid them. Long ago, I lost a
> >> GNU/Linux installation to "rm -rf"...  
> >
> > If Nethack lacks the ability to configure the location of the state
> > files, there is still a string (or several) in the source code that
> > looks like '/usr/share/nethack'. I think we should change this
> > string to something more appropriate instead of wrapping Nethack.  
> 
> Yeah, I would also prefer something along these lines.
> 
> What do you think, Kei?  Does that sound doable?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.

I'm not so sure. Is there a way that I can explicitly access the
home directory of the user that invokes guix? That is, something
clearer than "~/.nethack"?

-- 
Kei (GPG Key: 4096R/E6A5EE3C19467A0D)